Please provide the location in Autobiography of Yoga where the quote from Luther Burbank on reincarnation is given. (I couldn't find it.) Also please provide the exact date in the San Fransisco Examiner that you quote from and if possible show the actual article itself or point to it with a URL. (By the way, I have found many articles in newspapers to be inaccurate. In one instance Newsday claimed that my father was killed in a fire when in fact he was not at home when it happened. I was the one taken to the hospital from burns- and I survived the ordeal.)
With regard to Luther Burbank are you also disputing Yogananda's claim that he was a friend of Yogananda and received intitiation in Kriya.
With regard to the dual star issue this was raised a few weeks ago. Sri Yukteswar in the book "The Holy Science" talks of a star dual. Scientifically the earth's orbit goes through a procession every 25000+ (approx) years. This is a scientifically validated cycle that corresponds closely with the 24,000 "cycle" that Sri Yukteswar and others use to explain the cycles of evolution and de-evolution of mankind.
The field of astronomy is still coming to grips with the latest findings which now appear to show that the universe is exanding and the bodies are accelerating and growing further apart from each other. Now astronomers and others are having to postulate the existence of both dark matter and dark energy to explain these apparent strange sitings. Perhaps there is in fact a dual associated with the Sun that is made of dark matter.
Further, I find cosmology is going through a teething period where the information we have is constanly changing. For example, I have not found a good explantion of the calculation of the age of the universe based on the use of the Hubble constant to determine the distance of furthest galaxies from us. I have yet to see a reasonable explanation from astronomers as to how they claim that the universe is 13 to 15 billion years old (big bang theory) when the furthest and oldest galaxes they are able to see are 9 to 10 billion light years away. (We do not know as to how far away are the edges of the universe as our telescope can only see about 10 billion light years away and into the past.) The 13 billion year big bang model in my opinion does not hold up well to a euclidean or non-euclidean geometry model of the universe. One is also forced to postulate that early in the big bang that the particles associated with our portion of the galaxy travelled many times the speed of light for a very long time. Otherwise you cannot come up with the age of the universe that is less than approximately 25 billion years old - minimally double the figure provided by modern day cosmologists. How do the astronomers explain the fact that the particles slowed down below the speed of light and now are increasing again while the universe continues to expand? Please ask your learned astronomers how they can explain this. Ask them to explain how come Quasars are producing apparently more energy than is predicted by Einstein's equation E=MC^2.
Can I ask what your motives are with the recent posts you have made. Are you a scientific materialist or do you have a spiritual inclination of another sort from SRF and Kriya Yoga?